Welcome! This is a forum for vegans! Non-vegans: please search the now archived Going Vegan area if you have questions about going vegan.
Please register for full access. Go to Settings>Permission Groups to see all subforums.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Thanks Pob for sorting out the link I tried to post. I think that the only reason for circumcising a little boy should be for health reasons. It was for health reasons that one of my husband's younger brothers had this happen to him and so they took my husband along for the same too although there were no reason for him! He was 7 at the time. It's never been a big deal for him, although he remembers it hurting afterwards and having to dip the wounded area in a cold cup of tea! Poor thing.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I'm starting to wonder how people in North America can have such a laid-back attitude about circumcision. Like Korn said, it's considered strange and frightening in cultures where it's unheard of. But it's so normal here that barely anyone bats an eye about it. I can almost make the analogy to (and please don't attack me for saying this) people who have a laid-back attitude about eating meat and think it's perfectly normal. It's something that they do, and their parents did, and it's something that's just....done, no questions asked. Meanwhile people from predominantly vegetarian cultures who have never eaten meat may think that the idea is strange, frightening and disgusting.

It's interesting to think of the sorts of things that some people are conditioned to find totally normal and others find totally appalling.

"Man can do as he wills, but not will as he wills" - Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I don't think I would have the heart to do that to a baby. If I had a son I would be celebrating and welcoming the boy to the world with love. I couldn't then just hand him over to have his genitals cut. I might even kind of feel like I betrayed the kid.

And maybe human genitals are supposed to be ugly and stinky so that if you put your face down there, it's because you love the person.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I think there is a big difference between a female and male circumcision. As I understand, in a female the whole "pleasure center" is cut off and the vagina sawn toegther leaving just a tiny opening. I believe this to be very painful for a woman, who will never feel sexual pleasure and will most likely have an extremely painful birth.

I'm personally not in favor of male circumcision, but a man can still function normally and will most likely not have any future medical or sexual problems. That's the difference right there.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Korn

I don't think we're getting something out of calling people 'child abusers', but as a comment to this thread, there in many European (and other) countries it's quite common to consider circumcision child abuse. Laws against 'FGM' ("Female Genital Mutilation") exist in many countries.

FGM cannot be compared to circumcision. A penis is perfectly fine whether or not it is circumcised, but a young woman who has suffered FGM is in an absolutely different space.

It's hard for me to see how using a knife on any part of a little boy (and especially on his genitals) can be seen as such a different thing.

That's because it is not in your culture. Neither is FGM in mine, but even in muslim areas in France, Africa and other places women protest about it, and try to bring an end to the horrid practice. I have yet to see any circumcised man, apart from the witch-hunters on this forum, protesting about circumcision.

That laws against genital mutilation of animals exist, but no law against cutting in the penises of small baby boys surprises me

Of course it does, and as you say,

it is because circumcision isn't part of our tradition at all. ... Just hearing about it was frightening, and reminded me of stories about Chinese women forced to wear shoes to get small feet, woman doing weird stuff to get very long necks, or those American Indians who for some reason put something in their lower lip. Modifying genitals seemed (and still seems) like something more dramatic than modifying feet, lips or necks...

Who's changing the subject?
What I seriously want to know, Korn, is whether a question asked on a thread HAS to be answered the way you and everyone else believes (with a couple of kind exceptions) because when I gave my sincere response I was jumped on in a very nasty way. Where on earth is the moderator, or perhaps the moderator believes in witch hunts too?

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

eve

That's because it is not in your culture. Neither is FGM in mine, but even in muslim areas in France, Africa and other places women protest about it, and try to bring an end to the horrid practice.

Eve, I understand that this thread was for getting opinions and not to fall into confrontations. As vegans, some/most members (including myself) do not believe in causing pain to any living being and that includes babies. Please don't take it personally, it is a very emotional subject since it concerns pain. When people disagree to something they tend to be open as to why they disagree. It might be a cultural thing for you, but for many others it is a violation of their fundamental principles.

I have yet to see any circumcised man, apart from the witch-hunters on this forum, protesting about circumcision.

I don't think anyone has branded anyone as a witch. Of course people disagree with your views on the subject but quoting your statements does not imply they are attacking you. I disagree with you too, but I don't judge people based on such issues.

Life is like a boomerang: What goes around comes around - "Karma"rocks!

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

i did go to my sister's son's circumcision years ago and i was horrified and couldn't understand why my sister had arranged to get that done.
i had to go and stand outside and didn't feel much like talking to anyone for the rest of the day.
needless to say my son has not been circumcised, the idea didnt even cross my mind!

holding onto the dream that we imagined and painted forever more: elvinridge.co.uk

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

eve

I have yet to see any circumcised man, apart from the witch-hunters on this forum, protesting about circumcision.

Plenty of men who have been circumcised are not happy about it! And not just on this forum. The major religions are hardly going to get behind a campaign against male circumcision, now, are they, unlike with female circumcision.

I would have thought that veganism and enforced circumcision of babies for non-medical reasons would not be ideologically compatible.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

What I seriously want to know, Korn, is whether a question asked on a thread HAS to be answered the way you and everyone else believes (with a couple of kind exceptions) because when I gave my sincere response I was jumped on in a very nasty way. Where on earth is the moderator, or perhaps the moderator believes in witch hunts too?

Hi Eve,
this thread is about our views on circumcision. It's not only a yes/no-poll, it's natural to explain why we are pro or against against circumcision. I'm totally against circumcision; I'm against harming other living beings, causing physical pain, trauma, fear in them. Children and babies are more vulnerable than any of us. If we answer the question that is being asked, we are not witch hunters! It can't be expected that people who think circumcision is a horrible thing to do against an innocent child should not say it because someone else thinks it's OK.

It's totally understandable that people eat meat if they have been brought up with eating meat, many cannibal kids probably ate human meat without questioning it much, and I don't blame people brought up in a culture where circumcision is considered 'normal' for doing what they do - it's not these people I'm against, it's the action. And I know the difference between male circumcision and removing the clitoris of a woman.

That's because it is not in your culture

No. There's a lot of stuff that's not part of our culture that I'm defending/justifying etc., and there's a lot of things happening in our culture I totally disagree with.

Who's changing the subject?

If the subject is circumcision, and someone - like me - see a clear parallel to other traditions imposing pain in children, a comment about this isn't only relevant, but maybe needed if others shall understand how we see it. As a kid, I probably wouldn't have questioned circumcision if everybody else around me accepted it, but as an adult I not only question it, I'm against it. Most people follow the traditions of their own country, which is why I think "most people" feel that a lack of laws no laws against cutting in the penises of small baby seems strange to them.

I have yet to see any circumcised man, apart from the witch-hunters on this forum, protesting about circumcision.

But have you seen any non-circumcised men accepting someone using a knife on their penis without having asked for it? Or trying to do it on themselves? See the links below.

Where I live, there have been laws against removing parts of an animal (ear, tail) since 1974; it has been part of our culture (for a while) to do such things. There haven't been any laws against removing parts of human penises. It has been shown that circumcised can cause stress, pain hyper-sensityvty and disturb the mother/child relationship.

Scandinavians reading this thread may be interested in this article about problems caused by male circumcision. This is also interesting (but Norwegian).

Dear Eve, again: this isn't about witch-hunting parents who have been circumcising their kids, it's about defending the rights of a child; the right not not be 'interfered with' by others. Vegans are pr. definition against harming human and non-human animals. The links above show that one doesn't need to be a vegan to agree that circumcision is unnecessary, painful and definitely very similar to the interference in the lives and choices of other, living beings that we vegans are so much against.

I will not eat anything that walks, swims, flies, runs, skips, hops or crawls.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

It's interesting to see how circumcision is viewed by different people in different countries. Some see it as "mutilation", others see it as merely cosmetic, some do it for what they say are health reasons and some do it for cultural reasons (eg, Jewish people).

All the men in my family were circumsized and the men that I have been intimate with have all been circumsized too. The only one who wasn't was born and raised in a small village in Serbia.

So, for a lot of people in a lot of places in the world, circumsizion is an acceptable practice.

Just because someone believes in it and someone else doesn't - doesn't make anyone "right" or "wrong". It just makes them have a different opinion on the matter. And THAT is my opinion

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I find it interesting that its acceptable to religions, believing that humans were created by an all-knowing all-powerful god and then at best vandalising their creation or at worst saying that he/she/it didn't do a very good job and correcting their mistake.

"I don't want to live on this planet any more" - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

vegandrummersam

I've heard of this actually happening now. Sick. What about prevention through diet?

There ARE some women who have a very strong genetic predisposition to developing breast cancer. I would probably have mine removed if that was the case for me. I wouldn't do that to my daughter, though. She would have to make that decision as an adult.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Risker

I find it interesting that its acceptable to religions, believing that humans were created by an all-knowing all-powerful god and then at best vandalising thier creation or at worst saying that he/she/it didn't do a very good job and correcting their mistake.

well exactly!!

holding onto the dream that we imagined and painted forever more: elvinridge.co.uk

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

puffin

I think that reply to eve was a little harsh. Calling people child abusers is terrible. I dont believe in circumcision but i would never accuse someone of abuse just because i didnt agree with there actions.

But would you say I was abusing my cat if I her ears pierced? What about putting a ring through a bull's nose? If those are abuse, how is lopping the skin off of an infant's penis not abuse?

Cheers,
rant

PS. Sorry if that point's been made. I haven't read the whole thread yet. I just had to get that out.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Ah but Rant, don't you know it is not politically correct these days for us to criticise circumcision even though it is as cruel as those examples you mentioned, this is just in case we are seen as anti-semitic or some such nonsense!!! No one can say certain things without being branded a racist or anti-semite or anti-muslim these days. It's PC gone mad when we are asked to respect such abuse.

I have a Jewish (veggie!) friend whose father did not speak to her for several years because she had the guts to refuse the barbaric practice of circumcision for her son. There are some weird religious fundamentalists in so many religions and people are afraid to offend them. I'm surprised my friend ever spoke to her father again actually rather than the other way round.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

But would you say I was abusing my cat if I her ears pierced? What about putting a ring through a bull's nose? If those are abuse, how is lopping the skin off of an infant's penis not abuse?

Cheers,
rant

PS. Sorry if that point's been made. I haven't read the whole thread yet. I just had to get that out.

I think name calling is wrong. To call someone a child abuser is very hurtful. So would you say all jews are child abusers? I for one would never make such a statement. I am sure eve is a wonderful mother to her children.
I would never get my sons done? If i had a daughter would i get her ears pierced while she was a baby? no i wouldnt. Do i think its ok to hurt anyone for not good reason? no i dont. I hope i have answered your questions.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

kriz

I think there is a big difference between a female and male circumcision. As I understand, in a female the whole "pleasure center" is cut off and the vagina sawn toegther leaving just a tiny opening. I believe this to be very painful for a woman, who will never feel sexual pleasure and will most likely have an extremely painful birth.

I'm personally not in favor of male circumcision, but a man can still function normally and will most likely not have any future medical or sexual problems. That's the difference right there.

I'm not trying to defend female genital cutting, but there are actually several forms of the practice. They vary in severity from the worst, as you have described, to only the clitoral hood being cut, with several forms of moderate severity in between.

I wonder wonder which came first; femal or male genital cutting, and if it can be a slippery slope once it is decided that it is normal to cut babies' genitals.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

i think it is very wrong to choose to cut off a part of a baby's penis - no matter what cultural or religious beliefs you have. i think it is the same as cutting of a dogs ears or tail and it's not nessecary in any way.
it is not a problem with the hygiene, as long as you care just a little bit about washing. to me, it seems a bit like choosing to get your teeth removed, cause you don't wanna brush them

i really would NEVER choose this for a child. it's fine with me, if it's someone who's capable of choosing it for himself (a teenager or adult), but WHY should it be nessecary to do to a baby? i just don't get it, and i think it's very wrong and abusive, that it's so accepted in so many places and seen as a part of "normality" in so many societys.&#168;

i have no doubt that a lot of the parents who choose to get this done, are really trying to do the best for their children. but i think that this is a lot like the issue on milk; apparantly it's supposed to be healthy, but that's mainly cause you don't get told otherwise. i really think that people should question these things instead of just relying on the rest of the society to choose for them; i'm sure most of us agree that society is wrong on many issues! and i think that this is one of them, aswell as eating non-vegan foods.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

puffin

I think name calling is wrong. To call someone a child abuser is very hurtful. So would you say all jews are child abusers? I for one would never make such a statement. I am sure eve is a wonderful mother to her children.
I would never get my sons done? If i had a daughter would i get her ears pierced while she was a baby? no i wouldnt. Do i think its ok to hurt anyone for not good reason? no i dont. I hope i have answered your questions.

No, I wouldn't call them child abusers. I was making a comparison and giving people food for thought. I am trying to get a handle on what I perceive as a conflict between veganism and having an infant circumcized. I'm not trying to be the vegan police, but I see it as a conflict and I'd like to understand it.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

i think it would be helpful if we had some reallife comparisons.
i.e., guys in this forum who have or have not been circumcised, but then again, how can you really say wen you've only experienced one or the other

it's so obviously an assault on an innocent baby who can't speak for thems elves and who, if they could, would without any doubt in the world say no as their minds are still innocent too and they have not yet been forced fed religious dogma so how could anyone ever say that they have the right to do that?

having said that, once its done its done and they most probably grow up the same as everyone else and hopefully it doesnt bother them that much eccept for one thing,
they have been 'branded'' for life before they ever have a chance to decide for thems elves that they wish to be part of the religion of their parents and that is definately not right either !

holding onto the dream that we imagined and painted forever more: elvinridge.co.uk

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Only women seem to be in favour, even then only a minority, and we are not the ones affected. None of the men here seem to be in favour so far, whether they are circ'ed or not, I think that pretty much says it all.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I've heard a lot of stories about fathers who want their sons circumcised so they'll look like him. It's pretty much the only reason I've come across that a father would want that done to his sons. As if the sons will be confused and traumatized if their penises aren't identical to their father's! And what fathers and sons go around comparing penises all day anyway???

"Man can do as he wills, but not will as he wills" - Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Rantipole is the first circumcised male (#2) that I have ever heard that misses having a foreskin. I was about thirty the first time I encountered one.... he was ever so fastidious and wished he HAD been snipped. The next fellow lacked in hygiene. 2 unsnipped is enough: sex is just soooo much better with circumcised men. Thank you to all the snipping parents for my daughters future happiness!

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Well I've never slept with a circumcised man but surely the man's right to not be circumcised is more prevalent than his future sexual partner's gratification?
That's akin to giving girls vaginal surgery so their future sexual partner's enjoy it more. Does the rights of the child have no bearing on what is done to them?

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

John

I'm not trying to defend female genital cutting, but there are actually several forms of the practice. They vary in severity from the worst, as you have described, to only the clitoral hood being cut, with several forms of moderate severity in between

That's right, John, but I think the objective is different when it comes to female circumcision - it's done in some ways to mutilate a female and/or to lessen her sexual experience, while for males is mostly done for hygienical reasons (whatever one agrees with the practice ot not.)

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

As a hard-core vegan, my opinion on this subject is a strong NO. I have expressed it in my previous post here.

The concept according to me is very simple. Why are we vegans? Because we feel that nature made us fit for us to be herbivores and we try to live in accordance to nature as much as possible, and ethics is a major part of it.

If nature did not intend for the foreskin to be there, why would it have given it to every man in the first place? Everything is there for a reason. Who are we to go against the laws of nature? It is upto the person to decide if he wants to get circumcised. Forcing circumcision on a baby is not an ideal way to go. That over-rules any ethical principals I have and I hence conciser it inappropriate. On similar lines, I don't think a girl child's ears must be prierced.

A person can decide what he/she must do, when they are old enough to think for themselves. Till then, a parent must not take authority to inflict harm on a baby based on what they think is right.

I understand circumcision is a practice that is promoted by certain religions. But religions have been modified and changed over the centuries based on beliefs that certain group of individuals subscribe to. Religious circumcision is nonsense, and as invalid as animal sacrifice in the name of religion. How is it any different?

Life is like a boomerang: What goes around comes around - "Karma"rocks!

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

your experience aside, i've read articles that state the opposite regarding female sexual gratification. intuitively, that makes sense for a variety of reasons.

pat sommer

Rantipole is the first circumcised male (#2) that I have ever heard that misses having a foreskin. I was about thirty the first time I encountered one.... he was ever so fastidious and wished he HAD been snipped. The next fellow lacked in hygiene. 2 unsnipped is enough: sex is just soooo much better with circumcised men. Thank you to all the snipping parents for my daughters future happiness!

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Kiran

A person can decide what he/she must do, when they are old enough to think for themselves. Till then, a parent must not take authority to inflict harm on a baby based on what they think is right.

A friend of mine was circumcised at the age of 12 by his own will. His parents did not object, but did not endorse it either - it was completely up to him.
Today he's happy he did and never regrets it.

I had my ears pierced at the age of 8 after much nagging and I'm happy with my decision too. Even though I was young I made a choice which I thought was right for me.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I would not let my daughters (or son) get their ears pierced that young, my husband says not until they are 16, I would probably be a little more lenient and say about 13 or 14 is old enough to decide but will let him take charge on this one if it ever comes up (I can win some of the bigger battles if we disagree). If a parent allows nagging from an 8 year old to work, who is the boss there?? The parent or the child? I'd not have given in on it.

I don't think my kids will want to get piercings because I have told them I wish I had not had my ears pierced! I had a lot of soreness with them, however clean I kept them they always got red and sore, so I gave up on earrings, haven't worn them for years. My older daughter is 11 and because she has heard of my experience, she sees little point in ear piercing, I think my kids will probably be quite sensible about not wanting to be unnecessarily pierced or otherwise mutilated because of how myself and my husband both feel about it. He is more against it than I am.

In my experience little girls wanting to get their ears pierced is usually about bowing to peer pressure! One girl at my daughter's school (she sounds like a bit of a b!tchy bully from a few things my daughter has said), well she said to my daughter that she should not wear her hair behind her ears because she should not show her ears if they don't have earrings, apparenty ears without earrings are ugly! How rude of her and what a stupid thing to say! My daughter said she just gave this silly girl a funny look as if to say "you are a bit of a nut-job" and she tells me rather disdainfully that this girl is just a "fashion addict".
My daughter is a bit of a "chip off the old block" as they say, so I can't say I am disappointed in her attitude. I have talked to her about how harmful peer pressure can be and to always stand her ground, as I always did against peer pressure to do stupid things like smoking, and she will not go far wrong if she can hold her head high and know she is doing the safe and sensible things.

No doubt a boy who want to be circ'ed at 12 in the US only wants it to be the same as his friends. I'll bet in the UK the issue would have never arisen!

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

As I'm sure I've made clear on this issue pretty recently; completely disgusting, horrendous and abusive. It's male genital mutilation. Let's not kid ourselves or mince words. In Western cultures, female circumcision is seen by basically all as immoral and is illegal. Obviously there's a double standard here. Thank fuck I have not been cut, and I would never mutilate my body for the pleasure of sexual partners, basically because I have more self-esteem than that. I think Amy said it best (scroll up).

If a guy chooses to get this done then so be it and I can't disagree, but honestly, nothing can defend people who cut bits off baby's dicks. That's serious abuse.

And I hope no one tries to defend it with religion. Prove your God exists then I might accept there's another side to this, but until then it's just a-FUCKing-NOTHER example of people using their "beliefs" to act like weirdos and abuse children.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

your right; you are not funny. I try to put it in perspective: the really awful things kids go through starting from violent birthing procedures to the less prevalent today 'moulding' foreheads or feet, or tooth chipping down to scarification (tribal marks), at the bottom is circumcision. Ya, we humans are funny critters and do want to identify with our group. So, I shake my head sometimes at what we consider normal but I can't be too fussed about the rituals that have more benefit than risk.

It is legitimate to debate whether to wait for consent or carry out a practice when the baby has no fear and can quickly recover. Hell, jabs are worse than ear-piercing for pain. And full marks for bravery to the lads in Turkey who have their coming of age party 11-14 and midway through get snipped.

Just for the record IMO hymen cutting is closest equivalent for females. I know a couple of women who had their labia minor 'trimmed' in adulthood due to the prominent appearance. I was also happy to have raggy bits of hymen removed at the time of another procedure.

It is all open for debate. I just do actually give some room for historical precedent when the outcomes are healthy and happy.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

Amy, Kiran and Russ - I agree with everything you just said.

I strongly disagree with genital mutilation, be it male or female. IMO it is just plain wrong and immoral to mutilate a child in any way, whilst they are helpless and unable to decide for themselves. Circumcision is not medically necessary. It is not our body to abuse, whether for religious or cosmetic reasons.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I agree with RachelJune, Russ and Lilac Hamster and everyone else against this. Is one thing if it is a personal choice but there are enough healthy men who aren't circumsized to show that it isn't necessary.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

The thing I find most revealing in this thread is that (and please do correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm right) every male who has posted here opposes circumcision.

I think that says it all.

It seems the proponents of, or apologists for, involuntary circumcision (a.k.a. infant genital mutilation) in this thread have fallen back on
1. Accusations of anti-semitism
2. The historical precedent arguments
3. Women enjoy sex more with circumcised males
4. Circumcision is healthy and happy.

Well, let's see how I can respond to these...
1. Ridiculous. Of course I don't consider all Jews to be child-abusers. Just the ones who actually abuse children themselves by circumcising them. (Beside the point perhaps, but Jewishness can refer to a race and a religion and the two are not the same. To try to lump me into the same category as Hitler, Ernst Zundel and Henry Ford because I am against violence to children is pretty ridiculous, being that I oppose the cultural practice - in the same way I oppose the way pigs must be slaughtered in accordance with Judaism - rather than the right of genetic Jews to exist.) And this is not by any means limited to Jews, because Jews are not the only people in the world who by custom circumcise infants.
2. There are also historical precedents for eating meat, slavery and keeping women at home. I don't see you standing up on a soapbox to defend these things.
3. If you think it's okay to abuse someone else for your own, (or someone elses) sexual gratification - a child, nonetheless - what does that make you?
4. That's a pretty twisted world view, to think that lopping off body parts will lead to happiness, but okay. Let's forget that for a moment and consider that there is no difference in health or happiness between a circumcised male and an uncircumcised male who makes the minimal effort that is required to keep clean. While I'm obviously not going to say that circumcised males are unhappy, I'm certainly happier that I'm not circumcised (of course this may be a personal thing in that I resolutely oppose the practice and would hate it had it been done to me, though of course others - including circumcised males - do not share this view.) So I think it's fair to say that uncircumcised males have just as much potential for being healthy and happy.

I'm done, and I even managed to contend arguments without making personal attacks. Cause making personal attacks is what people do when they're cornered.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I agree with pretty much everyone on this forum.

Surely we have chose veganism because we reject that it is our right to inflict harm on another animal (be they human, or non-human) just because we can. The practise of genital mutilation on young children confers no significant health benefits to them. To do it for the purpose of aesthetics, on something/someone who cannot possibly give their consent, is barbaric.

I'm shocked that the 'argument' that doing so is justified for it increases a female partners sexual gratification is even being used.

Let's try and put it in perspective? As 'funny' as we 'critters' might be, to try and justify circumcism of babies (or ear piercing for that matter) by saying that a kid could go through a lot worse, is ludicrous. Let's all go around de-beaking, de-clawing and de-tailing all animals, because, lets face it, i'm sure it's at the bottom of the list of things we could do... I sure hope those animals think themselves lucky.

If a male, or a female, decides to get circumcised ('decides' being the operative word here), I have absolutely no issue with that. As I see it, particularly in practices with religious significance, isn't it far more preferential that an individual weighs up the reasons behind circumcision and still wants to go through with it? Rather than any old person pushing their beliefs on another individual, and saying that is okay, because it it what has always happened.

Hymen cutting is ridiculous. Pretty much everyones hymen breaks when they're kids naturally, just through normal activity. To bring this up as the closest equivalent to male infant circumcision, and then to say that a couple of female adult friends chose to have it done because they were a bit.. untidy, is utterly irrelevant in the context of this thread.

As to whether it is okay to debate whether or not consent should be given, I really don't see there is much to debate? Circumcision without that individuals consent is immoral and stupid. I'm done.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

The thing I find most revealing in this thread is that (and please do correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm right) every male who has posted here opposes circumcision.

I think that says it all.

I don't. I think with all of the anti-circumcision talk going on here, anyone that is pro-circumcision might be afraid to say that they are. I think there's only been 2 posters who have been brave enough to say that they are pro-circumcision and they were attacked for their opinion.

There might be a few people who aren't saying what they really want to for fear of the same.

Re: Circumcision or no circumcision?

I just coughed up water.

Excuse me? The only personal attack here has been directed at me for not being funny (when I was not even trying to be, which should have been pretty clear). No one has attacked proponents of circumcision on any personal basis, but MANY people have countered their arguments.

The possibility that people support circumcision but are too afraid to engage in debate is not an argument for circumcision. You get no points for this one.

I encourage proponents to engage abolitionists. Please. As far as I can see the only reason why a proponent would not post is because they cannot provide responses to the arguments of the abolitionists. The fear is that they might read something that changes their mind, not that they will be attacked, because this simply HAS NOT HAPPENED except on that one occasion where it was directed at me.